<p>
[quote]
Insofar as philosophical gourmet is seen as an indicator, it should be criticized for its inability to lead to good judgments.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You are drawing faulty conclusions from my statement: nowhere did I claim that the philosophical gourmet is a decisive or sufficient indicator in what constitutes a good philosophy department, nor did I ever claim that it is a necessary indicator.</p>
<p>You are drawing faulty conclusions from my statement. Nowhere did I claim that you claimed philosophical gourmet was a decisive or sufficient indicator; nor did I claim you claimed it was a necessary indicator. </p>
<p>I merely pointed out that you claimed it was ONE indicator in what constitutes a good department. And considering its use as an indicator (not decisive, but simply one indicator), it CAN be judged based on how useful it is in coming to a sound judgment. </p>
<p>If its information is not useful in the process of making reasonable judgments on departments (with or without other information) then it should be criticized for that.</p>
<p>Personally, I don't know enough about it to come to a judgment. I just know that many credible authorities have harshly criticized it for a number of reasons.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I merely pointed out that you claimed it was ONE indicator in what constitutes a good department. And considering its use as an indicator (not decisive, but simply one indicator), it CAN be judged based on how useful it is in coming to a sound judgment.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Not necessarily. Had I argued that it is a sole-indicator, then you could render your judgment. Using it as an indicator among many renders trivial any judgment about its overall usefulness, since one would have to decide how much that indicator actually contributed in the process, which is an arduous and arbitrary task.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If its information is not useful in the process of making reasonable judgments on departments (with or without other information) then it should be criticized for that.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Once again, neither Professor Leiter or I intended for the philosophicalgourmet to serve as a sole basis for making reasonable judgments on which department to choose, and anyone who uses it as a sole indicator is, by definition, not making a reasonable judgment. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I just know that many credible authorities have harshly criticized it for a number of reasons.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You keep saying this, but you give no links.</p>
<p>The philosophicalgourmet, however, is endorsed by many leading authorities in philosophy:</p>
<p>Ned Block (Harvard University)
Keith DeRose (Yale University)
John Etchemendy (Stanford University)
Gilbert Harman (Princeton University)
Shelly Kagan (Yale University)
Philip Pettit (Princeton University)</p>